Search

Purpose: Corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) is the primary treatment for progressive keratoconus which has a significant impact on vision and quality of life. Our study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of epithelium-on versus epithelium-off CXL to treat keratoconus. Methods: We searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. We included studies that compared standard epithelium-off with epithelium-on CXL. The primary outcome measures were changes in corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and maximum keratometry (Kmax), and the secondary outcomes were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), central corneal thickness (CCT), and adverse events. A meta-analysis was performed on the primary and secondary outcomes based on the weighted mean differences between baseline to 12-month follow-up. Results: The search retrieved 887 publications with 27 included in the systematic review. A total of 1622 eyes (1399 patients; age 25.51 ± 4.02 years) were included in comparisons of epithelium-off to epithelium-on CXL in keratoconus. Epithelium-off CXL treated 800 eyes and epithelium-on CXL for 822 eyes. At 12-month follow-up, CDVA and Kmax showed no significant difference between the epithelium-off and epithelium-on CXL. The secondary outcomes showed that UDVA was better in epithelium-off CXL (− 0.11D, 95% CI − 0.12, − 0.1; p < 0.001) and there was more thinning in CCT in epithelium-off CXL (− 3.23 μm, 95% CI − 4.64, − 1.81; p <0.001). Conclusion: Epithelium-off and epithelium-on CXL were both effective to treat progressive keratoconus. Further research is needed to compare the long-term outcomes and safety of both CXL protocols for adaptation into clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Management of NK can be difficult, involving a range of treatments with variable efficacy. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of medical and surgical treatments for neurotrophic keratitis (NK). Method: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrial.gov, and ScienceDirect were searched for studies assessing efficacy of NK treatments. We computed random-effect meta-analyses on corneal healing, time to complete healing, and visual acuity changes between baselines and after treatment, stratified on treatment classes. We followed the PRISMA guidelines (registration number CRD42021225721). Results: We included 20 studies: 571 patients and 5 treatment classes (2 surgical and 3 non-surgical). The percentage of patients with complete corneal healing did not differ between specific treatments (nerve growth factor eyedrops (NGF), 75%, 95CI 46 to 104%; autologous serum (AS), 92%, 86 to 98%; neurotization, 99%, 95 to 103%; amniotic membrane transplantation (AMT), 86%, 78 to 94%). All specific treatments had better percentage of complete healing (p < 0.001) than non-specific treatment groups, i.e., mainly lubricants (23%, 14 to 32). Time to complete healing was 24.2 days (5.4 to 43.1) with NGF, 27.6 days (15.2 to 40.0) with AS, 117 days (28.8 to 205.2) with neurotization, and 16.4 days (11.1 to 21.7) with AMT. Only NGF and AMT improved visual acuity. Efficacy outcomes were not affected by sociodemographic (age, sex) nor severity of disease (Mackie stages). Conclusion: We confirmed the efficacy of specific treatments in NK. Further comparative trials are needed to investigate the medical and economic benefits of innovative therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Corneal crosslinking (CXL) procedures are the treatment of choice in halting progressive corneal ectasia and preserving visual acuity due to keratoconus. Pulsed crosslinking (P-CXL) was developed using intermittent pulsing ultraviolet (UV) light to mitigate the depletion of oxygen levels that occurs with continuous UV exposure in standard crosslinking protocols (C-CXL). This study aimed to explore the use of P-CXL in the treatment of keratoconus and determine whether the availability of oxygen in P-CXL carries superior efficacy outcomes as an alternative to C-CXL modalities.This review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A search of several databases conducted with two separate reviewers resulted in 29 papers meeting inclusion criteria for the review, 14 selected for meta-analysis. Primary outcomes assessed by the included papers included maximum keratometry (Kmax), corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, UDVA), and secondary outcomes included central corneal thickness (CCT), endothelial cell count and demarcation line. Statistical analyses were carried out on Review Manager 5.4 and the meta-analysis employed a random-effects model, which estimated the weighted effect size of raw means using inverse variance weights.At 12 months P-CXL showed statistically significant reductions in Kmax (-0.75 D; p < 0.001) and improvement in CDVA (-0.10 logMAR; p < 0.001) compared to baseline. The meta-analysis of comparative studies determined that mean differences in Kmax, CDVA, UDVA, Kmean and CCT after 12 months were not statistically significant between pulsed and continuous crosslinking groups.Overall, P-CXL is effective in improving visual acuity and keratometry outcomes in keratoconus. The meta-analysis did not show a statistically significant difference in Kmax and CDVA between P-CXL and C-CXL, indicating a non-inferiority of P-CXL. However, findings of the meta-analysis are limited by the fact that different energy levels and exposure times were used for P-CXL in comparison to C-CXL in some studies, making it unsuitable to determine whether the efficacy of CXL is improved by the use of pulsed light.What is Known• Pulsed crosslinking (P-CXL) uses intermittent UV light to prevent oxygen depletion when using higher energy protocols, unlike continuous UV exposure in standard continuous crosslinking (C-CXL).• This should theoretically enhance the efficacy of the treatment by maintaining higher oxygen levels that are crucial to the cross-linking process.• There are no systematic reviews or meta-analyses directly comparing the efficacy or safety of P-CXL to C-CXL.What is New• Meta-analysis revealed differences in keratometry between P-CXL and C-CXL groups with equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) at 12 months were not statistically significant (Kmax -0.04 dioptres; p = 0.84).• Meta-analysis revealed differences in visual acuity between P-CXL and C-CXL groups with equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) at 12 months were not statistically significant (CDVA -0.01 logMAR letters; p = 0.57).• The use of intermittent pulsing in higher energy CXL protocols renders statistically similar outcomes as continuous light exposure at equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) Methods: Corneal crosslinking (CXL) procedures are the treatment of choice in halting progressive corneal ectasia and preserving visual acuity due to keratoconus. Pulsed crosslinking (P-CXL) was developed using intermittent pulsing ultraviolet (UV) light to mitigate the depletion of oxygen levels that occurs with continuous UV exposure in standard crosslinking protocols (C-CXL). This study aimed to explore the use of P-CXL in the treatment of keratoconus and determine whether the availability of oxygen in P-CXL carries superior efficacy outcomes as an alternative to C-CXL modalities.This review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A search of several databases conducted with two separate reviewers resulted in 29 papers meeting inclusion criteria for the review, 14 selected for meta-analysis. Primary outcomes assessed by the included papers included maximum keratometry (Kmax), corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, UDVA), and secondary outcomes included central corneal thickness (CCT), endothelial cell count and demarcation line. Statistical analyses were carried out on Review Manager 5.4 and the meta-analysis employed a random-effects model, which estimated the weighted effect size of raw means using inverse variance weights.At 12 months P-CXL showed statistically significant reductions in Kmax (-0.75 D; p < 0.001) and improvement in CDVA (-0.10 logMAR; p < 0.001) compared to baseline. The meta-analysis of comparative studies determined that mean differences in Kmax, CDVA, UDVA, Kmean and CCT after 12 months were not statistically significant between pulsed and continuous crosslinking groups.Overall, P-CXL is effective in improving visual acuity and keratometry outcomes in keratoconus. The meta-analysis did not show a statistically significant difference in Kmax and CDVA between P-CXL and C-CXL, indicating a non-inferiority of P-CXL. However, findings of the meta-analysis are limited by the fact that different energy levels and exposure times were used for P-CXL in comparison to C-CXL in some studies, making it unsuitable to determine whether the efficacy of CXL is improved by the use of pulsed light.What is Known• Pulsed crosslinking (P-CXL) uses intermittent UV light to prevent oxygen depletion when using higher energy protocols, unlike continuous UV exposure in standard continuous crosslinking (C-CXL).• This should theoretically enhance the efficacy of the treatment by maintaining higher oxygen levels that are crucial to the cross-linking process.• There are no systematic reviews or meta-analyses directly comparing the efficacy or safety of P-CXL to C-CXL.What is New• Meta-analysis revealed differences in keratometry between P-CXL and C-CXL groups with equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) at 12 months were not statistically significant (Kmax -0.04 dioptres; p = 0.84).• Meta-analysis revealed differences in visual acuity between P-CXL and C-CXL groups with equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) at 12 months were not statistically significant (CDVA -0.01 logMAR letters; p = 0.57).• The use of intermittent pulsing in higher energy CXL protocols renders statistically similar outcomes as continuous light exposure at equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) Results: Corneal crosslinking (CXL) procedures are the treatment of choice in halting progressive corneal ectasia and preserving visual acuity due to keratoconus. Pulsed crosslinking (P-CXL) was developed using intermittent pulsing ultraviolet (UV) light to mitigate the depletion of oxygen levels that occurs with continuous UV exposure in standard crosslinking protocols (C-CXL). This study aimed to explore the use of P-CXL in the treatment of keratoconus and determine whether the availability of oxygen in P-CXL carries superior efficacy outcomes as an alternative to C-CXL modalities.This review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A search of several databases conducted with two separate reviewers resulted in 29 papers meeting inclusion criteria for the review, 14 selected for meta-analysis. Primary outcomes assessed by the included papers included maximum keratometry (Kmax), corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, UDVA), and secondary outcomes included central corneal thickness (CCT), endothelial cell count and demarcation line. Statistical analyses were carried out on Review Manager 5.4 and the meta-analysis employed a random-effects model, which estimated the weighted effect size of raw means using inverse variance weights.At 12 months P-CXL showed statistically significant reductions in Kmax (-0.75 D; p < 0.001) and improvement in CDVA (-0.10 logMAR; p < 0.001) compared to baseline. The meta-analysis of comparative studies determined that mean differences in Kmax, CDVA, UDVA, Kmean and CCT after 12 months were not statistically significant between pulsed and continuous crosslinking groups.Overall, P-CXL is effective in improving visual acuity and keratometry outcomes in keratoconus. The meta-analysis did not show a statistically significant difference in Kmax and CDVA between P-CXL and C-CXL, indicating a non-inferiority of P-CXL. However, findings of the meta-analysis are limited by the fact that different energy levels and exposure times were used for P-CXL in comparison to C-CXL in some studies, making it unsuitable to determine whether the efficacy of CXL is improved by the use of pulsed light.What is Known• Pulsed crosslinking (P-CXL) uses intermittent UV light to prevent oxygen depletion when using higher energy protocols, unlike continuous UV exposure in standard continuous crosslinking (C-CXL).• This should theoretically enhance the efficacy of the treatment by maintaining higher oxygen levels that are crucial to the cross-linking process.• There are no systematic reviews or meta-analyses directly comparing the efficacy or safety of P-CXL to C-CXL.What is New• Meta-analysis revealed differences in keratometry between P-CXL and C-CXL groups with equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) at 12 months were not statistically significant (Kmax -0.04 dioptres; p = 0.84).• Meta-analysis revealed differences in visual acuity between P-CXL and C-CXL groups with equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) at 12 months were not statistically significant (CDVA -0.01 logMAR letters; p = 0.57).• The use of intermittent pulsing in higher energy CXL protocols renders statistically similar outcomes as continuous light exposure at equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) Conclusions: Corneal crosslinking (CXL) procedures are the treatment of choice in halting progressive corneal ectasia and preserving visual acuity due to keratoconus. Pulsed crosslinking (P-CXL) was developed using intermittent pulsing ultraviolet (UV) light to mitigate the depletion of oxygen levels that occurs with continuous UV exposure in standard crosslinking protocols (C-CXL). This study aimed to explore the use of P-CXL in the treatment of keratoconus and determine whether the availability of oxygen in P-CXL carries superior efficacy outcomes as an alternative to C-CXL modalities.This review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A search of several databases conducted with two separate reviewers resulted in 29 papers meeting inclusion criteria for the review, 14 selected for meta-analysis. Primary outcomes assessed by the included papers included maximum keratometry (Kmax), corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, UDVA), and secondary outcomes included central corneal thickness (CCT), endothelial cell count and demarcation line. Statistical analyses were carried out on Review Manager 5.4 and the meta-analysis employed a random-effects model, which estimated the weighted effect size of raw means using inverse variance weights.At 12 months P-CXL showed statistically significant reductions in Kmax (-0.75 D; p < 0.001) and improvement in CDVA (-0.10 logMAR; p < 0.001) compared to baseline. The meta-analysis of comparative studies determined that mean differences in Kmax, CDVA, UDVA, Kmean and CCT after 12 months were not statistically significant between pulsed and continuous crosslinking groups.Overall, P-CXL is effective in improving visual acuity and keratometry outcomes in keratoconus. The meta-analysis did not show a statistically significant difference in Kmax and CDVA between P-CXL and C-CXL, indicating a non-inferiority of P-CXL. However, findings of the meta-analysis are limited by the fact that different energy levels and exposure times were used for P-CXL in comparison to C-CXL in some studies, making it unsuitable to determine whether the efficacy of CXL is improved by the use of pulsed light.What is Known• Pulsed crosslinking (P-CXL) uses intermittent UV light to prevent oxygen depletion when using higher energy protocols, unlike continuous UV exposure in standard continuous crosslinking (C-CXL).• This should theoretically enhance the efficacy of the treatment by maintaining higher oxygen levels that are crucial to the cross-linking process.• There are no systematic reviews or meta-analyses directly comparing the efficacy or safety of P-CXL to C-CXL.What is New• Meta-analysis revealed differences in keratometry between P-CXL and C-CXL groups with equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) at 12 months were not statistically significant (Kmax -0.04 dioptres; p = 0.84).• Meta-analysis revealed differences in visual acuity between P-CXL and C-CXL groups with equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) at 12 months were not statistically significant (CDVA -0.01 logMAR letters; p = 0.57).• The use of intermittent pulsing in higher energy CXL protocols renders statistically similar outcomes as continuous light exposure at equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) Key messages: Corneal crosslinking (CXL) procedures are the treatment of choice in halting progressive corneal ectasia and preserving visual acuity due to keratoconus. Pulsed crosslinking (P-CXL) was developed using intermittent pulsing ultraviolet (UV) light to mitigate the depletion of oxygen levels that occurs with continuous UV exposure in standard crosslinking protocols (C-CXL). This study aimed to explore the use of P-CXL in the treatment of keratoconus and determine whether the availability of oxygen in P-CXL carries superior efficacy outcomes as an alternative to C-CXL modalities.This review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A search of several databases conducted with two separate reviewers resulted in 29 papers meeting inclusion criteria for the review, 14 selected for meta-analysis. Primary outcomes assessed by the included papers included maximum keratometry (Kmax), corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, UDVA), and secondary outcomes included central corneal thickness (CCT), endothelial cell count and demarcation line. Statistical analyses were carried out on Review Manager 5.4 and the meta-analysis employed a random-effects model, which estimated the weighted effect size of raw means using inverse variance weights.At 12 months P-CXL showed statistically significant reductions in Kmax (-0.75 D; p < 0.001) and improvement in CDVA (-0.10 logMAR; p < 0.001) compared to baseline. The meta-analysis of comparative studies determined that mean differences in Kmax, CDVA, UDVA, Kmean and CCT after 12 months were not statistically significant between pulsed and continuous crosslinking groups.Overall, P-CXL is effective in improving visual acuity and keratometry outcomes in keratoconus. The meta-analysis did not show a statistically significant difference in Kmax and CDVA between P-CXL and C-CXL, indicating a non-inferiority of P-CXL. However, findings of the meta-analysis are limited by the fact that different energy levels and exposure times were used for P-CXL in comparison to C-CXL in some studies, making it unsuitable to determine whether the efficacy of CXL is improved by the use of pulsed light.What is Known• Pulsed crosslinking (P-CXL) uses intermittent UV light to prevent oxygen depletion when using higher energy protocols, unlike continuous UV exposure in standard continuous crosslinking (C-CXL).• This should theoretically enhance the efficacy of the treatment by maintaining higher oxygen levels that are crucial to the cross-linking process.• There are no systematic reviews or meta-analyses directly comparing the efficacy or safety of P-CXL to C-CXL.What is New• Meta-analysis revealed differences in keratometry between P-CXL and C-CXL groups with equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) at 12 months were not statistically significant (Kmax -0.04 dioptres; p = 0.84).• Meta-analysis revealed differences in visual acuity between P-CXL and C-CXL groups with equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2) at 12 months were not statistically significant (CDVA -0.01 logMAR letters; p = 0.57).• The use of intermittent pulsing in higher energy CXL protocols renders statistically similar outcomes as continuous light exposure at equivalent fluence (7.2 J/cm2)  [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ophthalmic trauma is a leading cause of preventable monocular blindness worldwide. The prevalence of ophthalmic trauma varies considerably based on geographic location, socio-economic status, age groups, occupation, and cultural practices such as firework celebrations. Clinical registries are known to be valuable in guiding the diagnosis, management, and prognostication of complex diseases. However, there is currently a lack of a centralized international data repository for ophthalmic trauma. We draw lessons from past and existing clinical registries related to ophthalmology and propose a new suitable international multicenter clinical registry for ophthalmic trauma: the International Globe and Adnexal Trauma Epidemiology Study (IGATES). IGATES is hosted on a secure web-based platform which exhibits user-friendly smart features, an integrated Ocular Trauma Score (OTS) prognosis calculator, efficient data collection points, and schematic graphical software. IGATES currently has 37 participating centers globally. The data collected through IGATES will be primarily used to develop a more robust and improved ophthalmic trauma prognostic classification system, the Ocular Trauma Score-2 (OTS-2), which builds on previous systems such as the Birmingham Eye Trauma Terminology System (BETTS) and Ocular Trauma Score (OTS). Furthermore, IGATES will act as a springboard for further research into the epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of ophthalmic trauma. Ultimately, IGATES serves to advance the field of ophthalmic trauma and improve the care that patients with ophthalmic trauma receive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To report on the factors associated with severe vision loss from fireworks-related ocular trauma during celebrations, including festivals. Methods: Tertiary eye care hospitals in 5 countries and private ophthalmology practices in the Netherlands. Patients included received treatment for fireworks-related ocular trauma during celebrations. Demographic and clinical data for patients affected were analyzed and associations with severe vision loss reported. Results: Of 388 patients, 71 (18.3 %) had severe vision loss (worse than 6/60) at 4-week follow-up due to fireworks-related ocular trauma. Mean age overall was 20.6 years (range 2 to 83 years), and there was a male predominance of 4:1. Clinical factors associated with severe vision loss included penetrating injury (OR 4.874 [95% CI 1.298–18.304; p = 0.02]) and lens injury (OR 7.023 [95% CI 2.378–20.736; p = 0.0004]). More patients with closed-globe injuries (CGIs) had improved vision after 4 weeks (OR 3.667, 1.096–12.27) compared to those with open-globe injuries (OGI) (p = 0.035). Eye protection use was reported by 7 patients, and 39.4% patients < 18 years were unsupervised by an adult at the time of injury. Conclusions: Severe vision loss from fireworks-related ocular trauma occurred during celebrations in a variety of countries and was associated with penetrating and/or lens injury and poor presenting vision. New initiatives are needed to prevent severe vision loss associated with these injuries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To detail the methodology for a novel ocular trauma registry and utilize the registry to determine the demographics, nature of injury, and associations of severe visual loss for open globe injuries (OGI). Methods: Thirteen hospitals in 7 countries used International Globe and Adnexal Trauma Epidemiology Study (IGATES) platform. Patients presenting between April 2009 and 2020 with OGI (with or without) adnexal involvement or intraocular foreign body (IOFB) were included. Results: Analyses of presenting and final VA, using "severe vision loss" (VA ≤ 6/60) and "no severe loss" (VA > 6/60), were performed. Four hundred fifty-four (64%) patients had VA < 6/60 at presentation and 327 (44.8%) at final follow-up, with a highly significant association between presenting and final VA (p < 0.0001). From the cohort of 746 patients, 37 were missing VA at presentation and 16 at follow-up and complete clinical data was available for 354 patients. The male to female ratio is 6:1, and mean age 36.0 ± 20.0 years old. Relative afferent pupillary defect (RAPD), zone III injury, IOFB, and eyelid injury at presentation were recorded in 50 (6.7%), 55 (7.8%), 97 (13%), and 87 (11.7%) patients, respectively, and were significantly associated with VA < 6/60 at follow-up. Older age, ≥ 61 years, was associated with 3.39 times (95% CI: 1.95–5.89) higher risk than ≤20-year-old patients (p < 0.0001) and males 0.424 times (95% CI: 0.27–0.70) lower risk than female (p = 0.0001) of severe vision loss (SVL). Conclusion: In OGIs from 13 hospitals, female gender, older age, zone III injury, eyelid injury, and IOFB were associated with higher risk of visual outcome of SVL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To provide recent data on patient demographics, clinical profile and outcomes of patients with microbial keratitis over a 5-year period at the Sydney Eye Hospital, and to identify seasonal variations of the main causative organisms. Method: A retrospective study of patients with a clinical diagnosis of microbial keratitis and corneal scrape performed between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2016. Clinical information was gathered from medical records and pathology data. Results: One thousand fifty-two eyes from 979 patients with a mean age of 54.7 ± 21.5 years (range 18–100 years) were included. The majority of cases were bacterial (65%) followed by polymicrobial (2.4%), fungi (2.3%), and culture-negative (31%). Common risk factors for microbial keratitis were contact lens wear (63%) and previous topical steroid use (24%). Factors significantly associated with poor patient outcomes in the multivariate model were age, visual acuity, and epithelial defect size (p < 0.05). Patients with fungal or polymicrobial keratitis presented with worse clinical features at initial and final presentation (p < 0.05). There was a significant variation in the occurrence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (p = 0.018) and fungal keratitis (predominately made up of Candida and Fusarium species) (p = 0.056) in the hottest seasons. Conclusion: Poorer outcomes are more likely to be seen in older patients and those presenting with poor visual acuity and large epithelial defects at the initial presentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: 3-Hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR), the rate-limiting enzyme of cholesterol production, has been found to contribute to lipid secretion from skin sebaceous glands and hair follicles. We assessed for HMGCR expression in human eyelid tissue and in immortalized human meibomian gland epithelial cells (HMGECs) using immunohistochemistry. Methods: Full thickness human eyelid specimens in archival paraffin blocks were obtained. A section from each block was stained with hematoxylin and eosin and examined by an ocular pathologist for validation of tissue pathology. Immunohistochemistry was performed using rabbit anti-human HMGCR antibody on serial sections using the Ventana automated staining system. HMGCR expression was examined for in HMEGCs with fluorescence immunocytochemistry and confocal microscopy. Results: Thirteen full thickness eyelid specimens met the inclusion criteria. All specimens contained meibomian glands, and 2 (15%) contained glands of Zeis, 3 (23%) pilosebaceous glands, 2 (15%), accessory lacrimal glands, and 2 (15%), glands of Moll, respectively. Immunohistochemistry showed HMGCR expression in meibocytes of meibomian glands and sebocytes of Zeis and pilosebaceous glands in all specimens. HMGCR expression was also evident in vascular endothelium. Immunofluorescence was positive for HMGCR expression on HMGEC cells. No labeling was seen for the negative Ig control. Conclusion: HMGCR was expressed in all eyelid sebaceous-type glands and in HMGECs, consistent with a role for cholesterol production in the genesis of tear film lipids. The observed expression also provides a rationale for using topical statins, inhibitors of HMGCR, as novel tear film lipid stabilizers in conditions such as blepharitis, where meibum production is aberrant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

B Correction to: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology b https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-021-05284-z In the original published article, one of the "IGATES Fireworks study group" collaborators name has been misspelled. Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. [Extracted from the article]

B Correction to: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology b https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-021-05266-1 In the original published article, the individual collaborator names were not captured under the group name "IGATES Study Group". Authors would like to acknowledge and update the IGATES study group members - these members contributed to the IGATES study data. Authors would like to apologise for this oversight and use this opportunity to thank all the members and participants of IGATES study group. [Extracted from the article]